The prospect of building a Muslim mosque just a few blocks from ground zero is cringe-worthy.

I‘d wager that 99.9 percent of all Americans are, if not outraged, at least disquieted by the idea. Just because Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf has the right to build the mosque at that location, does not mean he should. If not on a legal level, on an intuitive level it is just wrong.

If this is about mending fences, then how can Imam Rauf not see the great opportunity he has to prove his good intentions? A real show of good will would be to, out of his love and respect for American sentiment, agree to build the mosque elsewhere. By that act alone, he could accomplish more fence-mending than any 13-story mosque ever will.

Americans in favor of building the mosque wield freedom of religion as their sword of righteousness. Those who view the mosque as an affront to the approximately 3,000 people killed by radical Muslim terrorists on 9/11 are labeled Islamophobes, ignorant bigots, racists, haters and Christians. Lately, "Christian" has been the insult of choice by anti-conservatives. If you are not giddy over the proposed mosque (it has a swimming pool!), you are sullying the country's national ideals — selfishly unwilling to show by example the wonders of tolerance.

A recent CBS poll found that 71 percent of Americans are opposed to the mosque. What are the other 29 percent? Hypocrites.

Here's why. The First Amendment grants freedom of religion to all Americans, thus legally allowing Imam Rauf to build his mosque. However, those that are all about the mosque and a bag of chips too only support him because Imam Rauf is considered a moderate, "peaceful" Muslim, a follower of Sufism, and this makes him an "acceptable" Muslim. If he were, for example, a follower of the Salfi interpretation of the Quran, with its practice of Shariah law, supporters would take back their chips in a heartbeat.

The First Amendment should not be subject to sanitation — free is free. Therein lies the current hypocrisy of the righteous 29 percent and the illumination of a complicated dilemma for America.

The tenets of Shariah, among many other vile practices, define women as "half the value of a man," direct that body parts be cut off for crimes of theft and women be stoned for adultery regardless of innocence, and consider homosexuality a crime punishable by death. These practices are the antithesis of the liberal platform and are abhorrent crimes against humanity. Again, if Imam Rauf were a radical Salfi, even Mayor Bloomberg, with his financial ties to the Middle East and apparent unwillingness to look into the funding of the mosque, would find a way to quash the project.

In truth, Islam and Shariah are inseparable, because in Islam there is no separation between church and state. If we apply the First Amendment unconditionally, Muslims are free to practice the codes of belief in their religion, including Shariah. In Britain, this has been quietly happening already — at least in family law.

In America, we will never accept the radical injustice and disregard for human rights in Shariah. In fact, any practice of Islam in a free society cannot include Shariah Law. Even though all Americans are entitled to constitutionally protected freedom of religion, Muslim Americans, whose interpretation of the Quran includes Shariah law, will never have the freedom to kill gays, stone women, engage in honor killings, or kill infidels in the name of Allah — at least not on American soil.

It is disturbing that just recently, a New Jersey trial judge found that a Muslim husband who raped his wife committed conduct that constituted a "sexual assault" but, because of his religion, did not hold the defendant liable because the defendant believed he was exercising his rights over the victim. Although the case was overturned on appeal, it's a clear example of how insidious this issue is.

President Obama has endorsed the mosque, saying, "This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakable. The principle that people of all faiths are welcome in this country, and will not be treated differently by their government, is essential to who we are."

This is all well and good but the critical issue of First Amendment interpretation, as it applies to the ever growing Muslim population, is looming large and presents a legal, moral and ethical dilemma for all Americans.